factory with straps; how many hundreds came home so
tired every night, that they could eat no supper for
sleepiness and want of appetite, that their parents
found them kneeling by the bedside, where they had
fallen asleep during their prayers; when one reads
all this and a hundred other villainies and infamies
in this one report, all testified to on oath, confirmed
by several witnesses, deposed by men whom the commissioners
themselves declare trustworthy; when one reflects
that this is a Liberal report, a bourgeois report,
made for the purpose of reversing the previous Tory
report, and rehabilitating the pureness of heart of
the manufacturers, that the commissioners themselves
are on the side of the bourgeoisie, and report all
these things against their own will, how can one be
otherwise than filled with wrath and resentment against
a class which boasts of philanthropy and self-sacrifice,
while its one object is to fill its purse a tout
prix? Meanwhile, let us listen to the bourgeoisie
speaking through the mouth of its chosen apostle,
Dr. Ure, who relates in his “Philosophy of Manufactures”
{167b} that the workers have been told that their wages
bore no proportion to their sacrifices, the good understanding
between masters and men being thus disturbed.
Instead of this, the working-men should have striven
to recommend themselves by attention and industry,
and should have rejoiced in the prosperity of their
masters. They would then become overseers, superintendents,
and finally partners, and would thus—(Oh!
Wisdom, thou speakest as the dove!)—“have
increased at the same time the demand for their companions’
labour in the market!”
“Had it not been for the violent collisions and interruptions resulting from erroneous views among the operatives, the factory system would have been developed still more rapidly and beneficially.” {168a}
Hereupon follows a long Jeremiad upon the spirit of resistance of the operatives, and on the occasion of a strike of the best paid workers, the fine spinners, the following naive observation: {168b}
“In fact, it was their high wages which enabled them to maintain a stipendiary committee in affluence, and to pamper themselves into nervous ailments, by a diet too rich and exciting for their indoor employments.”
Let us hear how the bourgeois describes the work of children: {168c}
“I have visited many factories, both in Manchester and in the surrounding districts, during a period of several months, entering the spinning-rooms unexpectedly, and often alone, at different times of the day, and I never saw a single instance of corporal chastisement inflicted on a child; nor, indeed, did I ever see children in ill-humour. They seemed to be always cheerful and alert; taking pleasure in the light play of their muscles, enjoying the mobility natural to their age. The scene of industry, so far from exciting sad emotions, in my mind,